Pukovnik7

New German battleships, and that's it. Everything else was a steaming pile of... Other good things were convoy mode (but that was screwed up) and removal of submarines (but I can't give WG any credit for it because they shouldn't have been introduced in the first place).

Fleet action to me means conflict between battle fleets - like in the game. Attacks on convoys and warships in transit do not count. But as you wrote... Frankly, I think subs need their own mode. Something like Grayhound scenario or the like. But yes, what you wrote is completely correct.

Submarines were also not used in fleet actions until Falklands, I think. Definitely long after World War 2 has ended. At best, they would provide interdiction and scouting for the fleet, trying to torpedo damaged warships and warships in transit. All so-called "fleet" submarines, which were designed for fleet actions, were abject failures. Also, diving is not smokescreen. Which is precisely the reason why subs are so annoying. Smokescreen does not make you invulnerable to surface gunfire and destroyer torpedoes - diving does. Smokescreen limits your freedom of movement to area of the smokescreen and the area where smokescreen breaks line of sight - with diving, you can go literally anywhere so long as your dive period lasts. So your idea about submarines being more like torpedo destroyers with a dive instead of smoke, I fear, would not make submarines fun.

Honestly, it is garbage. At basically all tiers up to Tier 10, you get dynamic gameplay: people pushing, counterpushing, brawling... but at Tier 10, that simply isn't so. Everybody just stays at max range spamming HE, and if one side starts pushing, the other side beelines it for the map border to escape the firespewing dragons. So why is that? I had thought it was the maps - and they definitely have a lot of impact - but Tier IX is much more fun and dynamic even when maps are the same. But doing experiments now with Friedrich der Grosse and Grosser Kurfurst, I have noticed several things: Fire chance is much higher at Tier 10. At Tier 9, it took literally half the enemy team (don't ask - I pushed to aggressively out in the open sea) shooting at me to set fewer fires than a single cruiser managed at Tier 10. Fire spammers in general have advantage at Tier 10, as some cruisers there outrange the same-tier battleships, and you basically have to use range mod if you want to survive - otherwise, between superior range, agility and rate of fire, all that it will take to kill you is a single kiting cruiser. Battle ranges are also much longer at Tier 10. Likely primarily due to more open maps, but also the fire spammers above, and the fact that large ships wallow like pigs in mud, combat happens at close to extremes of any given ship's range. Am I missing something here? And related to the above, as somebody who likes to play at close-to-mid range, should I just give up on Tier 10 and sell Grosser Kurfurst? Because, so far, playing Tier 10 is the closest I came to wanting to uninstall the game. Games very rarely to almost never close to the secondary gun range, as even in the late game enemy team prefers to run away to their own side of the map while kiting instead of trying to actually stop the push at close range. Overall, it seems to me that Tier 10 is simply not worth the time and effort necessary to reach it.

And that shows precisely what I have written. BTW, take out Tier 10 (which I definitely do suck at, mostly because I am not interested in the Tier 10 long-range snipe spam) and then redo the linear winrate graph. I am really interested in what it will show then.

Completely missed these posts before... Thing is, DDs die on low and mid tiers as well, yet average low-mid tier match is far more fun than average high tier match. Same goes for everything else - player quality is roughly the same on every tier, because there are many new potatoes that cashgrab their way to high tiers (I can't count the number of times I have citadelled a broadside ARP Yamato at 10+ kilometers) and many experienced players that go back to playing low tiers due to either grinding new lines or simply being sick of high tier wank. So I think that punishing mistakes thing may be more due to a difference between offense and defense. At low tiers, battleship can take several torpedo salvoes by a destroyer. At high tier, one salvo with 50% hit rate is usually enough to kill a battleship. At low tiers, battleships will often miss other battleships even at short range (as in, enemy is a klick away, all frontal turrets aimed at him... and shells splash all around the target). At high tiers, you will get semi-reliable citadels against cruisers at 10 - 15 kilometers. Also, since destroyers are much larger, they are also much less survivable... I remember using V-25 to simply sail in circles around enemy battleship and spam torpedoes. Suffice to say, it is not something I would dare to do at mid or high tiers. I am not really seeing it. My win rate is by far the best in Tier VII, because that is where Gneisenau and Scharnhorst are. In fact, my win rate by tier goes 7 > 2 > 3 > 8 > 5 > 6 > 9 > 1 > 4 > 10. And the only tiers where my win rate is not within +-2,5% of 50% are tiers 4 and 10. So in other words, my win rate has absolutely no visible connection to tier, excepting the fact that my Tier 10 win rate is particularly bad. Tier Battles Win rate PR Avg. frags Avg. damage Avg. planes destroyed Max. frags Maximum damage Max. planes destroyed 320 48.13% 2 219 2.02 13 081 0 8 Eritrea 39 822 Hermelin II 551 52.99% 2 664 1.53 23 116 0 8 V-25 106 905 Sampson 629 51.67% 1 564 1.07 23 355 0.1 6 Valkyrie 102 866 G-101 8 Bellerophon IV 211 46.92% 731 0.73 23 001 1.56 4 Orion 81 103 Orion 24 Wyoming 180 49.44% 786 0.62 27 390 1.03 4 König 133 958 Königsberg 25 König VI 382 48.95% 900 0.6 34 274 2.24 4 Dunkerque 134 765 Dunkerque 23 Dunkerque 532 55.26% 1 078 0.65 37 808 2.69 4 Gneisenau 142 849 Gneisenau 35 Gneisenau VIII 523 50.1% 985 0.55 46 472 3.57 5 Bismarck 162 878 Vanguard 46 Bismarck 114 48.25% 1 097 0.55 56 620 2.36 4 Friedrich der Grosse 125 936 Friedrich der Grosse 27 Friedrich der Grosse X 103 37.86% 646 0.45 54 089 2.8 3 Grosser Kurfürst 158 522 Grosser Kurfürst 26 Grosser Kurfürst The only connection I have found is that Gneisenau and Scharnhorst are extremely fun ships to play which do well with dynamic, aggressive playstyle - which is more-or-less true of all the ships I do well in. Meanwhile, in ships which require passive playstyle or which are pushed into long-range sniping role by the meta (e.g. Grosser Kurfurst) I do not do well at all.

Exchanged a New Year Certificate for Satan's Container, expected flags at best. What I got instead...

I'd like to participate.

How Warfare Shaped History – History and War (wordpress.com)Warfare has shaped society from its inception. It may not be something many people are comfortable thinking about, but modern society was created by a series of wars. Impact of warfare on human society could be compared to impact of geography, climate, natural resources, economics and ideas.Even events that had happened hundreds or thousands of years ago still revebrate to this day. Roman expansion brought the Empire into contact – and conflict – with Persia. Those two empires waged a series of wars, last and greatest of which left them both exhausted and vulnerable to expansion of Islam. And Islam expanded almost exclusively through warfare, especially in its first centuries, conquering wast swathes of territory – from Gibraltar to India, from Kazakhstan to Indonesia. Expansion of Islam brought it into contact with many peoples, including Turks – who would proceed to capture Roman Anatolia. This in turn caused Romans to turn to West for help, and this cry for help prompted the Pope to call for the First Crusade. But the Fourth Crusade would sack Constantinople, causing the Roman Empire to fragment – and while Constantinople would be recaptured, fragmentation of the Empire would endure. Eventually, constant infighting would cause Romans to turn to Ottoman Turks as mercenaries, but the Ottomans soon turned against the Empire, capturing its territories one by one. Eventually, they would set their sights on Constantinople.

And because T10 maps are too open, thus allowing too few avenues of attack (none, until the lines had been thinned out).

Thanks. So, once I gain knowledge, HE spam will cease preventing pushing and high tier gameplay will stop being boring? I have had several cases where I had three fires set on me in a single salvo. And if it came after I had burned my damage con on a flooding caused by CV torpedoes... yeah. Also, most low-tier matches were also kinda sit-back-and-snipe. At any rate, I am fine waiting twenty minutes for a brawl, if I can reasonably expect to have one (well, unless I've had a frustrating day and desperately need to blow off some steam, but that is kinda a special case - and I'm more likely to play Operations in such a situation). I will despise it, and spend the entire time frustrated, but I can do it. I am NOT fine with game ending without any close-range combat or, worse, without any close-range combat and with 80% of ships of both teams being still alive at the end of the game... and that is, basically, what majority of Tier 10 matches that I had actually lived to the end of looked like. You know how Vanguard plays like? Yes, I cannot claim to do particularly well in her (~50% WR), but she is one of my favorite battleships, alongside Gneisenau and Viribus Unitis. That being said, she and Dunkerque are also the only sniping battleships above Tier 5 I find fun to play... not that I played many of those (only King George V and Colorado come to mind out of T6+ battleships). But the point is, while I prefer brawling, I don't need to be up close the whole time to have a fun game. But even there islands make it a far better experience, as they mean I have to hunt snapshots against targets instead of just WASD-ing and waiting for somebody to show a broadside. If they do anything, maybe. But a ship that dies tanking 1 - 2 million potential damage has probably contributed far more than such snipers.

Pacific War 4 – Sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse – History and War (wordpress.com) Introduction According to the Japanese war plan, attack on Pearl Harbor was merely a side note – an attack whose main purpose was to enable the conquest of southeastern Asia. While the attack on Pearl Harbor was prepared in strict secrecy, preparations for the conquest of southeastern Asia were made out in the plain sight – both to help divert attention from preparations for attack on Pearl Harbor, but also because any possibility of serious resistence in the area was unlikely to the point of fantasy. Yet these areas were extremely important due to raw resources they would provide to Japanese industry and war potential. Attack was to be executed in multiple areas and by multiple groups simultaneously, to deny enemy the time necessary for organizing resistence. Forces were thus split accordingly, and protection was provided by the Southern Fleet under command of vice admiral Nobutake Kondo. This fleet was divided into main group, group for Philippines, and group for Malaya. Independent of the fleet were small naval detachments meant for conquest of isolated US bases in the Western Pacific. Main group of the southern fleet consisted of battleships Haruna and Kongo, aircraft carriers Ryujo and Sunyo (sic!; perhaps Junyo), heavy cruisers Atago and Chokai, as well as a destroyer flotilla. Philippines group consisted of seaplane carriers Noturo and Kumikawa Muru, heavy cruisers Ashigara, Haguro and Myoko, old cruisers Nagara and Kuma, and three destroyer flotillas. Malaya group consisted of four new heavy cruisers of Mogami class: Mogami, Mikuma, Suzuya, Kumano, a destroyer flotilla and three submarine flotillas. These forces were tasked with protecting extensive landing forces and auxilliaries. Groups also received extensive ground-based air support, with the Philippines group receiving 175 aircraft and Malaya group 550 aircraft. Navy also provided 300 aircraft for the Philippines group and 150 for the Malaya group. Navy also left 275 aircraft as a reserve in Japanese bases. These large forces penetrated into Southeast Asia according to a very detailed plan, based around a series of simultaneous or quickly successive landings – just at Philippines, landings were made at nine different places. Normal pattern of Japanese amphibious landings was to choose a place within strike range of land-based air bases, so that carrier air wings could always be held in reserve for a potential naval battle. Invasion would open with massive air strikes against air bases, followed by naval and air bombardment of the landing area. Finally, landing would be undertaken, again with support of aircraft and ships. Ships used for shore bombardment were destroyers and light cruisers, with heavy cruisers being utilized only on occasion, and battleships never, so that the fleet was always ready for a potential naval battle. Each landing group had its own screening forces of cruisers and destroyers. In the rear was the majority of the southern fleet of admiral Kondo, consisting of fast carriers and fast battleships, in order to intercept any potential enemy fleet attacks against the landing area.

I very much doubt that the score card contains "I want battleships to play more like destroyers"...

I already did... several times in fact, I think. But primary change would have to be larger number of well positioned islands, so that ships can get out of bad situations, as well as close in to support destroyers more easily. I am aware of that. But it doesn't change the fact that sniper-type ships are simply boring. The only ones I've had any fun with are French battleships and HMS Vanguard. I tried playing lower-tier British and American battleships (i got to King George V and Colorado classes before giving up), as well as some others on the test server, and I wanted to rip out my hair in frustration. Depends on where you are. If you are far out on the flank, or have an island handy, then yes, AP can be angled against. Which is why the first thing I learned in the game is that middle is suicide: if you are playing in the center, then yes, you have no choice but to stay far out to manage AP. But if you can angle, then AP is actually more dangerous from far out: I have penetrated well-angled battleships through the deck with AP when they were far enough to be hit by the plunging fire, and also had the same thing happen to me once or twice. HE cannot. It is either full damage, or not getting hit at all. That is what I play destroyers for. Although I am considering getting into main battery BBs and torpedo DDs.

Yeah, I noticed that. What I try to do is find an island and try to tank enemy fire until an opportunity shows up for a push, thus exploiting that "everybody loves to shoot at GK" thing, but even with that I seem to lose health pool way too fast to be really useful at tanking. I die too quickly... and it is still boring, even if it is far more fun than sniping from the backline. AP however can be angled against. He + fire cannot really be defended against, considering some cruisers can reliably hit the beam of the battleship. Yes. I play battleships primarily for their secondary guns. If I cannot expect to get within secondary gun range, then the ship/ match / tier is not worth playing as far as I'm concerned. Reason why people think there are many bad players on Tier 10 is because so many matches end up in wipeouts. And from what I have noticed, the reason so many matches end up in wipeouts is because mechanics and map design at Tier 10 do not give many tools to stop enemy push once one team had lost several ships, or even to prevent early loss(es) into snowballing further. So it is not bad players, it is bad game design. Pushing to that distance early in the game is always a mistake, irrespective of the tier. Problem I have with Tier 10 is that "early in the game" usually ends up translating into "whole damn match". Basically, it is either long-range spamfest on both sides, or else one team has broken and is running for the map border.

Actually, they do. Several times when I tried to tank enemy fire in Kurfurst, I had to pull back from the island because cruiser was sitting out in the open, just beyond the range of my main batters, and raining down HE without me being able to do anything in response. Probably a combination of a range mod and a spotter plane, but still... Problem I have with Tier 10 is that in most battles, this "when you can get close" is "never". Most of the Tier 10 battles I have been in - or at least ones I have survived - had begun and ended without either side's battleships coming within polite distance (cca. 5 - 10 km) of each other. So I get frustrated, try to force the issue... and yeah, that pretty much explains my Kurfurst performance.

Thirded. I have also seen ships "bunny-hop" over islands. Like, ship blows up... and hops to the top of nearby island. So submarines literally "ruined everything"?

So on paper, before I started playing them, French destroyers seemed scary: large gunboats with no smoke and thus little way to get out of the dodge. But now? They are probably my favourite destroyer line out of the four I have played thus far (EU, French, British and German). They are excellent at bullying other destroyers away from caps, and between good AP and reload booster can even win gunfights with cruisers (though it is still recommended to avoid such stuff). Their downsides such as large size, bad concealment and lack of smoke can be solved through usage of terrain, so they are not really a problem unless there is a CV around. So what next after them?

It definitely makes it easier, thanks.

OK, I had finally bought back my Friedrich der Grosse... and I will be holding onto her. Grosser Kurfurst I will keep because she will become a coal ship IIRC, but Friedrich der Grosse I genuinely enjoy far more than Grosser Kurfurst. And I can't figure out why. I mean, on stats, Grosser Kurfurst has better artillery and slightly worse maneuverability. But when playing? Friedrich der Grosse seems to handle like a fat cruiser (or perhaps a slightly oversized Bismarck, or Vanguard even) while Grosser Kurfurst handles like a comatose sloth / zombie pig. And while Kurfurst has one more gun per turret, I actually seem to have better performance with FdGs guns: turrets appear to turn faster, and guns have better and more consistent performance. Latter I guess may be due to FdG being a tier lower, but I honestly sometimes get an impression that FdG would perform better at Tier 10 than GK does. So, why?

I have SE on all my destroyers... oh well, I will no longer play destroyers, it seems.

Huh? My FdG WR is perfectly average for the ship, and she is better (for me) than Grosser Kurfurst - in the latter, my WR is full 10% lower than the FdG one. Also, don't spec FdG for max accuracy. Waste of time. You are a tank and a brawler - go for armor (survivability build) or secondaries (full secondary build), or some combination of the two. Your main guns are there to help out the secondaries, keep that in mind and you'll be fine. Of course, this still doesn't mean you should pull a Gneisenau and bumrush enemy battleships - among other things, you have no torpedoes. But as others have said, put her on the flank and push when the time comes.

Pacific War 3 – Preparations Before the Invasion of Malaya – History and War (wordpress.com) Malaya had for long time been safe, but this had rapidly changed in the last decade. Japanese imperial ambitions had led them to sieze and annex Manchuria in 1931 – 1932. In 1934, Japane renounced the Washington agreements, and in 1937 invaded China. Meanwhile, tensions had been rising in Europe, with British being well aware that the policy of appeasement will only delay war, not prevent it – yet that was the time they desperately needed. Singapore Naval Base was officially opened in February 1938., but it became clear that deploying a large fleet to it would be impossible. After the fall of France and Italian entrance to war, British had to suspend their plan to send a large fleet to Far East. Even so, decision was made to defend Singapore, which would be a British centre of gravity in the Far East. Japanese Army had been tied down in China, which meant that there would be time enough to deploy reinforcements. But the plans did not foresee direction of war in 1940. and 1941., with British suffering a defeat after defeat. As a result, no reinforcements were available when Japan attacked. Japanese themselves exploited situation in Europe to full. After the fall of France, Japan was able to secure permission from the Vichy French government to occupy French Indochina. This greatly increased threat to Singapore, as now Japanese ground troops and air bases were in range of Singapore. At the same time, strong American reaction to Japanese expansionism meant that war was Japan’s only choice, as it could not give in to American demands. When Germany attacked USSR in June 1941., Japan had a choice to attack either Russia or Great Britain. But several factors pushed towards the latter, most importantly the fact that Russian Far East did not have all the resources that Japan needed to support its economy. Thus, a decision was made to occupy Malaya and Dutch East Indies. Occupation of the French Indochina fulfilled a major strategic prerequisite, allowing Japan to directly threaten both Malaya and Singapore. But it also meant that Japan was locked on a war path: occupation of Indochina meant that United States, Britain and Netherlands all slapped embargo on Japan, and with no access to oil, Japan had to turn to conquest in order to secure oil supply.

You know, if I didn't know this was a parody in advance, I never would have noticed.

Apparently, Dunkerque should be kept at no more than cca. 2 ship lengths away from any targets...